Abstract
Creativity is recognised as an essential twenty-first century skill. Despite the significant volume of research on creativity, there remains considerable ambiguity in the way it is conceptualised within education. This study uses a qualitative approach to explore primary educators’ (n = 9) perceptions of creativity in English, science, and history. Key questions include how creativity is conceptualised, how it manifests in the classroom and if, or how, descriptions vary across discipline areas. The results show that whilst primary educators struggle to describe creativity in the abstract, they can provide clear descriptions within their disciplinary context. Considerable differences in terms of creative thinking skills were detected in each represented discipline. In line with the literature, we suggest ways in which future research can elaborate on these creative thinking skills to reconceptualise the way creativity is developed and assessed within education.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Not applicable.
Code availability
Not applicable.
Notes
The seven general capabilities identified in Australian Curriculum are Literacy, Numeracy, Information and Communication Technology, Critical and Creative Thinking, Personal and Social Capability, Ethical Understanding, Intercultural Understanding (ACARA, 2015a).
Project Zero is a research hub sponsored by Harvard Graduate School of Education. It is focussed on learning, thinking and creativity with an emphasis on the Arts and cross-disciplinarity work. A range of resources are available for teachers’ use http://www.pz.harvard.edu.
Key Learning Area or KLA is the term given to school subjects in the official curricula of the Australian state of New South Wales.
References
ACARA. (2015a). General capabilities. Retrieved from ACARA https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/general-capabilities/critical-and-creative-thinking/
ACARA. (2015b). Critical and creative thinking. Retrieved from ACARA https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/general-capabilities/critical-and-creative-thinking/
Andiliou, A., & Murphy, P. K. (2010). Examining variations among researchers’ and teachers’ conceptualizations of creativity: A review and synthesis of contemporary research. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 201–219.
Ardzejewska, K., McMaugh, A., & Coutts, P. (2010). Delivering the primary curriculum: The use of subject specialist and generalist teachers in NSW. Issues in Educational Research, 20(3), 203–219.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA]. (2015c). Critical and creative thinking learning continuum. Retrieved from ACARA https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/media/1072/general-capabilities-creative-and-critical-thinking-learning-continuum.pdf
Baer, J. (1993). Creativity and divergent thinking: A task-specific approach. Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.
Baer, J. (2010). Is creativity domain specific? In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 321–341). Cambridge University Press.
Baer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 16–29.
Beghetto, R. A. (2019). Taking beautiful risks in education. Educational Leadership, 76(4), 18–24.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (n.d.) Thematic analysis: A reflexive approach. Retrieved from The University of Auckland https://www.psych.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/thematic-analysis.html
Colin, T. R. (2017). Analyzing ambiguity in the standard definition of creativity. Avant: Journal of Philosophical-Interdisciplinary Vanguard, 8(S), 25–34.
Corazza, G. E. (2016). Potential originality and effectiveness: The dynamic definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 28(3), 258–267.
Council of Australian Governments Education Council. (2019). Alice Springs (Mparntwe) Education Declaration. Education Services Australia. Retrieved from www.educationcouncil.edu.au
Craft, A. (2001). Little c creativity. In A. Craft, R. Jeffrey, & M. Leibling (Eds.), Creativity in education (pp. 45–61). Continuum.
Craft, A. (2003). The limits to creativity in education: Dilemmas for the educator. British Journal of Educational Studies, 51(2), 113–217. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8527.t01-1-00229
Craft, A. (2005). Creativity in schools: Tensions and dilemmas. Psychology Press.
Cropley, D. H., & Patston, T. J. (2019). Supporting creative teaching in the classroom: Myths, models, and measures. In C. A. Mullen (Ed.), Creativity under duress (pp. 267–288). Springer.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–328). Cambridge University Press.
Dobbins, K. (2009). Teacher creativity within the current education system: A case study of the perceptions of primary teachers. Education 3–13, 37(2), 95–104.
Elliot, V. (2018). Thinking about the coding process in qualitative data analysis. The Qualitative Report, 23(11), 2850–2861. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3560
Glăveanu, V. P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The five A’s framework. Review of General Psychology, 17(1), 69–81.
Glaveanu, V. P., Ness, I. J., & de Saint Laurent, C. (2020). Creativity, learning and technology: Opportunities, challenges and new horizons. Creativity Research Journal, 32(1), 1–3.
Gonski, D., Arcus, T., Boston, K., Gould, V., Johnson, W., O’Brien, L., … Roberts, M. (2018). Through growth to achievement: Report of the review to achieve educational excellence in Australian schools. Retrieved from ERIC https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED586130.pdf
Han, K. S. (2003). Domain-specificity of creativity in young children: How quantitative and qualitative data support it. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 37(2), 117–142.
Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: Distinctions and relationships. Educational Studies, 30(1), 77–87.
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12.
Kervin, L., Vialle, W., Howard, S., Herrington, J., & Okely, T. (2015). Research for educators (2nd ed.). Cengage Learning.
Little, V. (1983). What is historical imagination? Teaching History, 36, 27–32.
Lucas, B. (2016). A five-dimensional model of creativity and its assessment in schools. Applied Measurement in Education, 29(4), 278–290.
Lucas, B., Claxton, G., & Spencer, E. (2013). Progression in student creativity in school: First steps towards new forms of formative assessment. (OECD Education Working Papers, No. 86). OECD Publishing.
Mullet, D. R., Willerson, A., Lamb, K. N., & Kettler, T. (2016). Examining teacher perceptions of creativity: A systematic review of the literature. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 9–30.
NESA. (2017). Science and Technology K-6 Syllabus. New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA). Retrieved from https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/learning-areas/science/science-andtechnology-k-6-new-syllabus.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13.
Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: The case for content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11(2), 179–182.
Plucker, J. A., & Beghetto, R. A. (2003). Why not be creative when we enhance creativity. Teachers College Press.
Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan, 42(7), 305–310.
Ritter, S. M., Gu, X., Crijns, M., & Biekens, P. (2020). Fostering students’ creative thinking skills by means of a one-year creativity training program. PLoS ONE, 15(3), 1–18.
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96.
Schutte, N. S., & Malouff, J. M. (2019). A meta-analysis of the relationship between curiosity and creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.421
Scoular, C. (2018). Equipping teachers with tools to assess and teach general capabilities. Paper presented at the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) Research Conference August 13, Teaching Practices that make a difference: Insights from research. https://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference/RC2018/13august/10
Scoular, C., Duckworth, D., Heard, J., & Ramalingam, D. (2020). Collaboration: Definition and structure. Australian Council for Educational Research. https://research.acer.edu.au/ar_misc/39
Sternberg, R. J., & O’Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 251–272). Cambridge University Press.
Thurlings, M., Evers, A. T., & Vermeulen, M. (2015). Toward a model of explaining teachers’ innovative behavior: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 430–471.
Tirri, K., Cho, S., Ahn, D., & Campbell, J. R. (2017). Education for creativity and talent development in the 21st century. Education Research International. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5417087
Vanderlinde, R., & van Braak, J. (2010). The gap between educational research and practice: Views of teachers, school leaders, intermediaries and researchers. British Educational Research Journal, 36(2), 299–316.
Vincent-Lancrin, S., González-Sancho, C., Bouckaert, M., de Luca, F., Fernández-Barrerra, M., Jacotin, G., Urgel, J., & Vidal, Q. (2019). Fostering students’ creativity and critical thinking: What it means in school. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/62212c37-en
Wallach, M. A. (1985). Creativity testing and giftedness. In F. D. Horowitz & M. O’Brien (Eds.), The gifted and talented: Developmental perspectives (pp. 99–123). American Psychological Association.
Weisberg, R. W. (1993). Creativity: Beyond the myth of genius. W.H. Freeman & Co.
Wilson, M. (2009). Measuring progressions: Assessment structures underlying a learning progression. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 716–730.
Wyse, D., & Ferrari, A. (2015). Creativity and education: Comparing the national curricula of the states of the European Union and the United Kingdom. British Educational Research Journal, 41(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3135
Funding
The research reported on in this paper was completed under the auspices of the following seed grant from the Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities at the University of Wollongong: Jones, P. T., & Georgiou, H. (2018). Teaching in the curriculum disciplines: The ‘dual mandate’ of creativity and constraint [$13,827]. UOW.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
As per manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Not applicable.
Ethics approval
University of Wollongong Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) Approval #2018/509 and NSW State Education Research Approvals Process (SERAP) #2018773.
Consent to participate
As per Ethics approvals.
Consent for publication
As per Ethics approvals.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix A
Semi-structured Interview Questions
-
How did you become interested in History/Physics/Poetry? Can you describe how it developed for you?
-
What is special about your field? What makes it different from studying x or y?
-
What does a student gain from studying this subject—what understandings, skills and dispositions?
-
And those students who don’t go to university to study this subject, what do they gain?
-
What contribution does your subject make to learning in other fields?
-
What does your subject offer to help solving contemporary social challenges or issues such as climate change? Or migration?
-
What does it mean to be creative or innovative in poetry/physics/history? What does it mean to be critical?
-
Is this different from creativity/innovation/critique in y or z? If so, how?
-
When should students begin studying poetry/physics/history? Why?
-
How should it be taught? What kinds of activities should learners engage in? What kinds of teaching and learning resources are important? Are there core texts? What role does dialogue play?
-
What does learning poetry/physics/history look like in primary school/in high school/at university?
-
Do you think that the content of the stage you teach is enough or is too much? What should they do? Where? And are there gaps?
-
Is there a critical point for learning in this subject?
-
What do you think a developmental sequence is for your subject?
Appendix B
Coding Table with Definitions and Examples
NODE | DEFINITION/CRITERIA | EXAMPLE |
---|---|---|
DEFINITIONS OF CREATIVITY | Creativity as an abstract concept (in the context of primary school). Includes discussions of the significance of creativity who can/can’t be creative and ‘non examples’ | “I think with creation and creativity, I think when a child makes something that wasn’t there before.” “The creation for the kids who are already more capable, like the high end of the spectrum, is really good” “you want them to be creative, you don’t want them just to give a stock-standard answer that they can get out of a book.” |
CRITICAL THINKING | Discussions of critical thinking either independently or in relation to creativity | “I think ‘critical thinking’ can find why and how because without critical thinking, you cannot find the reason and how you apply your thinking or the skills, or your knowledge. I think that’s the important part.” |
MANIFESTATIONS | Explicit examples of creative practices or moments in the classroom | “we’re definitely using poetry and literature very much for kids to innovate from, so it gives them a base, you know, structure-based ideas, and something to inspire and launch from with the language and the structure of the text and the ideas in it” |
TEACHING FOR CREATIVITY | ||
Creative Thinking Skills | ||
Sub-nodes | ||
Analysis | Skills related to critiquing, analysing information or deep-thinking | “So, in terms of skills, it’s about understanding sources, it’s about being able to analyse information, and it’s about being able to develop key questions.” |
Communication | Skills related to communicating ideas | To me, that’s where the creativity comes in—is the communication part. So, it’s about how we reinterpret that information in a new way for others” |
Curiosity | Skills related to being curiosity or engaged | “…help them think about how they can use what they’re interested in to be creative in how they solve problems.” |
Inquiry | Skills related to questioning, investigating, autonomous learning or the use of inquiry as a pedagogy | So, a lot of guided inquiries; we looked at “investigate”—what is the investigation, what are the steps, so we looked at making up a testable question, predicting, giving a reason, then doing your observation and explaining your results.” |
Open-mindedness | Skills related to a willingness to try new things | “Try some new things and explore a few different options which I think is the most important part of creativity … Kids are afraid to try things new because they’re afraid they’ll get it wrong.” |
Problem-solving | Skills related to the problem-solving process | “Well, when they’re actually working through a problem, an investigation, you know, they really have to problem-solve, they have to get together, they have to have a lot of skills, they have to collaborate, they have to work with their partners." |
Foundational Skills and Knowledge | ||
The broad set of specific disciplinary skills and knowledge required for fostering creativity, but not necessarily skills identified as explicitly ‘creative’ | I feel like because we’re dealing with such facts and things like that, we have to take them down a certain path first |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McLean, N., Georgiou, H., Matruglio, E. et al. Understanding creativity in primary English, science, and history. Aust. Educ. Res. 50, 581–600 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-021-00501-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-021-00501-4